Craigmissed —

Craigslist backtracks, drops exclusive licensing on posts

Craigslist doesn't want complete ownership of user posts anymore.

Craigslist v. Sites-Prettying-Up-Its-Content has been getting heated lately. At the beginning of the month, the classified king took perhaps its strongest action yet to block competitors. Craigslist added a click-through demand where all posters had to agree to an exclusive license for their ads. The move meant Craigslist would have complete ownership of the site's user-generated content, as exclusive licenses indicate a transfer of copyright under US copyright law.

Now, just a week later, Craigslist has backpedaled from this position. The Electronic Frontier Foundation noticed Craigslist removed click-through demand today. The site has removed the "exclusive license" language, though the EFF points out it has not reverted all the way to its previously wide open ownership terms of use (in '08 and '11: “craigslist does not claim ownership of content that its users post.”).

For a site known for its bland look, it has been a colorful few weeks for Craigslist. In addition to the license flip-flop, Craigslist sued PadMapper and 3Taps at the end of July. It accused these sites of copyright infringement and unfair competition. And just this week, Craigslist asked search engines to stop indexing ads so that these sites wouldn't be able to harvest cached copies.

35 Reader Comments

I thought this was kind of funny all along. I'm not a lawyer but doesn't claiming sole ownership over user-created content weaken your safe harbor position under the DMCA and other applicable laws? Wouldn't them having ownership of ads for illegal activities open themselves up for a huge legal fight?

They probably took a random sampling of 100 ads, analyzed them for spelling, grammar, and general accuracy in describing the products being sold, and determined that striving for sole ownership was an exercise in foolishness. Who would want to own the collective shortbus of the internet (the crown of which still goes to Youtube commenters)?

Could anyone who actually a lawyer tell us a legal reason for this? The first thing that came to mind upon reading this was that claiming complete ownership over child prostitution posts probably isn't a smart move. But could this have gotten them in trouble, or just an embarrassing situation?

I thought this was kind of funny all along. I'm not a lawyer but doesn't claiming sole ownership over user-created content weaken your safe harbor position under the DMCA and other applicable laws? Wouldn't them having ownership of ads for illegal activities open themselves up for a huge legal fight?

My guess is this is why they're backtracking. They're in an untenable position: if they own the content, they're legally responsible for it. If they don't, they can't sue anyone for copying it.

The really funny part is if they had just hired someone to do something like 3Tap, none of this would have been an issue.

They probably took a random sampling of 100 ads, analyzed them for spelling, grammar, and general accuracy in describing the products being sold, and determined that striving for sole ownership was an exercise in foolishness.

Either that or people were far less likely to put up an ad after the click-through.

They probably took a random sampling of 100 ads, analyzed them for spelling, grammar, and general accuracy in describing the products being sold, and determined that striving for sole ownership was an exercise in foolishness.

Either that or people were far less likely to put up an ad after the click-through.

Yeah, they COULD have seen usage of their services plummet after that. Would not surprise me one jot.

They should have a subscription service for a better interface! Maybe they should make an API, license the content to third party sites (not permitting them to show their own along side, prohibiting them from doing a 180 and switching to their own ads with a non compete.) the heart of the matter is simple, you can license the content to others with restrictions that ensure that they won't bite your backside. Craiglists value comes from their postings not their interface. Allowing others to create better interfaces, and ones you haven't even thought of, or creates a larger ecosystem, if properly licensed increases profit, viability, or whatever Craig wants for the site. When you create an ecosystem, you can make things much better. Take Apple for example, at first iOS (then called iPhone OS) didn't allow native apps restricting people to Web apps. After people showed an overwhelming desire for richer and more functional applications, Apple opened up the iOS platform to apps to harness the iPhone in new and unconventional ways to produce things Apple never dreamed of,while maintaining control of the iPhone. The App Store is now considered one of the most powerful aspects of the iPhone, as side from bringing in a sizeable amount of revuene . It simple comes down to this, you don't have to keep your products locked up to your website to make a profit, Change the world, etc.

Of course, they never really wanted to ability to prevent people from reposting personal ads. They just wanted Padmapper to behave like adults and stop copying their index. And now they've found a technical solution, so the legalese they rushed to implement before that solution in order to give teeth to their claims about Padmapper is no longer necessary.

Figured they'd do this right after they came up with a technical solution.

technophile wrote:

Ryoshi wrote:

The really funny part is if they had just hired someone to do something like 3Tap, none of this would have been an issue.

Somewhat. But really, it wouldn't have been an issue if 3Tap had just tried to grow their userbase organically.

Really though, the only winner in this whole saga is 3Tap, which is part of why this entire thing annoys me. 3Tap probably knew from the outset they'd get shot down by CL in various ways, but the resounding internet rally around them and the general publicity for their company (actions don't matter, it looks like this publicity, though it should have been "bad," pulled a reversal and ended up good publicity), means that they are probably going to have a much larger user base now anyways. It wasn't even a gamble, it was only a matter of how far ahead they'd end up coming out of it.

Losing the CL data shouldn't be a big deal. They can make statements saying it is, but really, if they are trying to grow their business legitimately, instead of hitching a ride with an unwilling driver trying to kick them off the roof, this move has been great for them. I know people keep saying CL is acting like a "big company," though every single move seems much more like a small business owner trying to protect their assets by any means, 3Taps is probably pulling the big company move in terms of an elaborate PR stunt. As to whether they actually planned it or it just somehow fell in their lap is another matter.

This is really great. I really didn't see how this was anything more than a value add to CL they don't have to pay for. They still host the critical piece, the psotings themselves, which are now more discoverable.

Now if they would just fix their posting verification. I can't post anymore because for whatever reason it refuses to try and verify with the cell phone and number I have had for years. I can only assume that it is because I at one time had Google Voice attached to the number. Like many, I have no other phone, so for now I can't post my old furniture or computer gear. Kind of frustrating and of course emails to support go unanswered.

Thrid Parties (2011): Hey craigslist you have a ton of useful information but it could be presented better, web 2.0 and all that. Since information should be free we'll just source your data and link back to you

Craigslist (mid 2012): THOSE ARE MINE GIVE THEM BACK INFORMATION MINE WAAAAAHH!!!

Thrid Parties (2011): Hey craigslist you have a ton of useful information but it could be presented better, web 2.0 and all that. Since information should be free we'll just source your data and link back to you

Craigslist (mid 2012): THOSE ARE MINE GIVE THEM BACK INFORMATION MINE WAAAAAHH!!!

At least that's how I see it.

While I think the way Craigslist has dealt with the issues at hand was not the right way to go, I can somewhat see why they are coming from.

Every site that I have seen that uses craiglist data has bypassed craigslist completely. If too many people stop going to the site.. there is no more craigslist, thus making the entire argument irrelevant for those using craigslist as a datasource.

CL does not have ads. They charge to post job openings and apartment rentals in some markets. Hence, a third party site that uses their data to present in different fashions only increases the audience for paying posters and in turn makes it more compelling to use/pay XL.

And it is not CL 's data. It belongs to the original posters and the most posters would rather have a larger audience. Scraping it off CL website would be against the terms of service which is why these third parties did it off search engines.

I'm not sure,but I suspect what CL might be worried about would be competition from one of these sites once they became a little more established. I.e., if PodMapper became the go-to site for rentals, they might begin to sell their own ads in addition to CL ads - publishing both - and eventually would take away business from CL.

I like CL the way it is. The site was mobile ready bedore there was mobile! No useless graphics on CL.

"Just the ads maam, just the ads."

Once CL gets scraped, the same freakin' ads will show up on a dozen sites. When you try to "research" the item for sale, you get multiple copies of the ad. Worse yet, these sights may not kill the advert promptly when the item is sold.

Once CL gets scraped, the same freakin' ads will show up on a dozen sites. When you try to "research" the item for sale, you get multiple copies of the ad. Worse yet, these sights may not kill the advert promptly when the item is sold.

This. For those of you cheering 'go CL screenscrapers!' and/or 'why the 1995 interface?' ... be careful what you wish for. By keeping things deliberately simple, CL avoids complex, potentially unwanted behaviors. They keep their overhead low and their rates stay low too. And their accessibility stays high.

CL competitors should actually compete. The resource, "people who want to place and view free ads", is abundant. So CL competitors should actually mine it themselves, rather than scraping the (minimally?) refined product off the top of the CL process.

They probably took a random sampling of 100 ads, analyzed them for spelling, grammar, and general accuracy in describing the products being sold, and determined that striving for sole ownership was an exercise in foolishness.

Either that or people were far less likely to put up an ad after the click-through.

Yeah, they COULD have seen usage of their services plummet after that. Would not surprise me one jot.

They probably took a random sampling of 100 ads, analyzed them for spelling, grammar, and general accuracy in describing the products being sold, and determined that striving for sole ownership was an exercise in foolishness.

Either that or people were far less likely to put up an ad after the click-through.

Yeah, they COULD have seen usage of their services plummet after that. Would not surprise me one jot.

Once CL gets scraped, the same freakin' ads will show up on a dozen sites. When you try to "research" the item for sale, you get multiple copies of the ad. Worse yet, these sights may not kill the advert promptly when the item is sold.

This. For those of you cheering 'go CL screenscrapers!' and/or 'why the 1995 interface?' ... be careful what you wish for. By keeping things deliberately simple, CL avoids complex, potentially unwanted behaviors. They keep their overhead low and their rates stay low too. And their accessibility stays high.

CL competitors should actually compete. The resource, "people who want to place and view free ads", is abundant. So CL competitors should actually mine it themselves, rather than scraping the (minimally?) refined product off the top of the CL process.

That's right, same old story, vultures feeding on carrion. And if it's not completely dead, the jackals will kill it, consume it, and squeeze it out in some stinking form they call their own. Law of the (inet) jungle. CL wasn't up to the $truggle to keep it's site. Scum prevails. No value added. Happens with Linux quite frequently.

You people claiming that 3Tap etc "didn't add value" and that CL is "super easy to use" -- did you even look at what 3Tap was doing? Presenting an easy map interface for looking for apartments (like, you know, every MLS site everywhere does because people like to look for places to live in certain areas) and linking back to the original CL ads absolutely added value and made CL easier to use for a very common use case.

In fact it added value for CL itself since they make their money on paying to post apartment ads. This is seriously one of the stupidest snit fits I've seen since the Dallas Morning News tried to forbid people from linking anywhere except their front page.

Day in and day out, knock-off clothing and jewelry is sold on CL. I don't think CL wants to get into a legal fight with DKNY, Armani, Gucci, or any other deep-pocket fashion designer that can suddenly target an entity with a face and money on their hands.

I'm not sure,but I suspect what CL might be worried about would be competition from one of these sites once they became a little more established. I.e., if PadMapper became the go-to site for rentals, they might begin to sell their own ads in addition to CL ads - publishing both - and eventually would take away business from CL.

Alternatively, CL simply may not like to have their ads scraped.

++

Padmapper redirected you to CL when you clicked on the actual apartment ad (or wherever else they scraped from).. Though that does cut down on all the useless clicks when you were going by just the improper descriptions that don't always tell you if their listing is in your desired neighborhood, which in turn would cut down on page views..

or is this for publicity before they introduce their site redo? (weren't they looking for someone to do that recently?)